Elizabethan Church of England, Adiaphora, & Imperial Edict

20 March 1563.


On March 20, 1563, an appeal was made to the ecclesiastical commissioners by twenty petitioners to exempt them from the use of vestments. Miles Coverdale was one of them. Later, Miles Coverdale refused to attend Lambeth over the "vestments, fashions and haberdashery" issue as ordered by Mr. (Canterbury) Matthew Parker.


Anglicanism’s adiaphora = “You’ll wear our ecclesiastical uniforms and outfits that we tell ya,’ by God you will.”


Elizabeth's "Adiaphora" = in essence and by another name, was Elizabeth's "divine law."


Miles Coverdale, Godfather at the baptism of one of Knox's children in Geneva, Bible translator, and former Bishop of Exeter, refused mandatory "uniforms and haberdasher" laws. The same for old John Foxe. Willing to use the vast majority of the BCP, they weren't buying the "adiaphora" argument as allegedly adiaphora, but back to old Miles Coverdale--Tyndale's assistant. If truly adiaphora, then the vestments weren't needed but voluntary. But the Crown and Canterbury weren't buying the logical logic.


Old Miles Coverdale, a sensible scholar, Reformed Churchman, Bible translator, comrade of other Marian exiles, who suffered for the faith, never bought into the supremacism nor fashion puerilities of Lambeth and the Royal palace.


By summer of 1566, Coverdale left St. Magnus Martyr by the London Bridge. He was near 80. Mr. Matthew Parker (Canterbury), a pliable tool, had summoned the London clergy to Lambeth for the enforcement of Elizabeth’s vestarian-laws—which Parker did not care about, as a few letters show, but which he supported since Elizabeth had ruled; she was the “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England, after all. Rather than do a “buy-in” for a position, the old scholar, Coverdale, resigned his living at St. Magnus. Several letters from London clerics were sent to Zurich and Geneva about the child-playground-developments. Coverdale discreetly—but visibly—absented himself from Parker’s summons to Lambeth.


Ya’ don’t bulldoze an old, experienced, informed, Biblically-driven, theologically trained and Reformed Churchman long acquainted with suffering, poverty, tyrannies, and exile.


As might be expected, he had a “keen following in Puritan circles” those wicked non-conformists of the lower sort tongue in cheek). But, he accepted poverty over preferment, consistency before compromise, the Scriptures above and ruling tradition, and principles above pandering to a Queen. He genuinely believed in Scriptures, the “supreme” [and final] Judge in all things, matters, opinions, councils and independent thoughts. That’s Reformed theology.


In JAN 1569, he preached his last sermon, about 83 years old, at his former parish, St. Magnus. In other words, he was the former minister in attendance but without the post—having resigned over principle. However, for whatever reason, the presiding minister was not present or available. But Coverdale was in attendance, but not presiding, an indication of his acceptance of the-then-used 1559 Book of Common Prayer (or, at least, in the main, as was the case for Anglo-Puritans). John Hooker (supra) described it:


“…certain men of the parish came unto him, and earnestly entreated that considering the multitude was great, and that it was pity they should be disappointed of their expectation, that it would please him to take the place for that time. But he excused his age and infirmities thereof, and that his memory failed him, his voice scarce could be heard, and he not able to do it, that they would hold him excused. Nevertheless such were their importunate requests that, would he nould [sic] he, he must and did yield unto their requests: and between two men he was carried up into the pulpit, where God did with his spirit so strengthen him, that he made his last and the best and the most godly sermon that ever he did in all his life. And very shortly after he died, being very honourably buried with the presence of the duchess of Suffolk, the earl of Bedford, and many others, honourable and worshipful personages."


Coverdale died on 20 JAN 1569. He was buried in the chancel of St. Bartholomew by the Exchange under the “communion table” [hint, TFOs, the “table” not the Laudian altar…gotta a problem there? Cranmer and Coverdale didn’t.]


The backstory to the childish-playground debate in Anglican adiaphoristic non-adiaphorisms.


Wikipedia gives some background.


“On March 20, 1563, an appeal was made to the ecclesiastical commissioners by twenty petitioners to exempt them from the use of vestments. These included a number of prominent clergy, mainly in the diocese of London, whose bishop, Grindal, had packed his see with former exiles and activists for reform. The petition was approved by all the commissioners except Parker and Guest, who rejected it.


“Sampson and Humphrey were the first nonconformist leaders to be targeted by Parker and whose steadfast refusal to conform led to Sampson's quick deprivation in 1565, as he was directly under the queen's authority. Humphrey, under the jurisdiction of Robert Horne, the bishop of Winchester, was able to return to his position as president of Magdalen College, Oxford, and was later offered by Horne a benefice in Sarum, though with Sarum's bishop, Jewel, opposing this. At this time, Bullinger was counselling Horne with a position more tolerant of vestments, while nonconformist agitation was taking place among students at St John's College, Cambridge.


“Tuesday, March 26, 1566, brought the peak of enforcement against nonconformity, with the diocese of London targeted as an example, despite Parker's expectation that it would leave many churches `destitute for service this Easter, and that many [clergy] will forsake their livings, and live at printing, teaching their children, or otherwise as they can.' The London clergy were assembled at Lambeth Palace. Parker had requested but failed to gain the attendance of William Cecil, Lord Keeper Nicholas Bacon, and the Lord Marquess of Northampton, so it was left to Parker himself, bishop Grindal, the dean of Westminster, and some canonists. One former nonconformist, Robert Cole, stood before the assembly in full canonical habit. There was no discussion. The ultimatum was issued that the clergy would appear as Cole—in a square cap, gown, tippet, and surplice. They would `inviolably observe the rubric of the Book of Common Prayer, and the Queen majesty's injunctions: and the Book of Convocation.' The clergy were ordered to commit themselves on the spot, in writing, with only the words volo or nolo. Sixty-one subscribed; thirty-seven did not and were immediately suspended with their livings sequestered. A three-month grace period was given for these clergy to change their minds before they would be fully deprived.


“The deprivations were to be carried out under the authority of Parker's Advertisements, which he had just published as a revised form of the original articles defining ecclesiastical conformity. (The full title is Advertisements partly for due order in the publique administration of common prayers and usinge the holy sacramentes, and partly for the apparrell of all persons ecclesiasticall, by vertue of the Queenes maiesties letters commaunding the same.) Parker had not obtained the crown's authorisation for this mandate, however, though he increasingly positioned himself toward the nonconformist clergy as acting on and under the authority of the state. Royal authority stood to simplify the problem for him, because disobedience of the monarch was disobedience of God. However, without explicit backing from the queen and council, this assertion lacked force. Thus, the nonconformist reaction to Parker's crackdown was, as he expected, a vociferous assertion of their persecuted status with some serious displays of disobedience. John Stow records in his Memoranda that in most parishes, the sextons did not change the service if they had conducted it without vestments previously: `in some places the ministers themselves did service in their gowns or cloaks with turning collars and hats as they were wont to do, and preached stoutly and against the order taken by the queen and council and the bishops for consenting there unto.' By some lights, these clergy constituted an emerging Puritan faction, and that word was indeed first recorded as being in use at this time as term of abuse for nonconformists.”


Miles Coverdale, as well as old John Foxe, weren’t up for the “abusive,” “elbows-to-the-head,” “boots-to-the-neck,” hubristic and unnecessary authoritarianism of Elizabeth and Parker.

"Adiaphora" = Elizabeth’s and Parker’s "non-adiaphora."

29 Feb 1528: Patrick Hamilton, Scotland's 1st Protestant Martyr

29 February 1528. Scotland’s 1st Protestant Martyr at the Hands of Scots-Roman policies. Lest we forget. And because God has not forgotten (it's as a yesterday to His Majesty and Rev. 6.9ff).

Mr. (Dr.) Rusten reports the following story, pp. 121-122. Rusten, E. Michael and Rusten, Sharon. The One Year Christian History. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2003. http://www.amazon.com/The-Year-Christian-History-Books/dp/0842355073/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1393302630&sr=8-1&keywords=rusten+church+history. We have added other details to the story.

Patrick Hamilton was burned at the stake on 29 Feb 1528.

Mr. Hamilton was born of a noble family in Scotland and was a distant relative of a Stuart king, James V. He graduated from the University of Paris in 1520. He began digesting the Lutheran documents. He returned to Scotland in 1523. He was unhappy with the Scots-Italian church. He went to Leonard’s College, St. Andrews University, to study theology.

But, Scotland’s Parliament banned Luther’s book in 1525 (like the Anglo-Italian bishops in Canterbury and London). In 1526, Hamilton declared in favor of Luther. By 1527, he received 3 summons by Mr. (Abp.) Beaton to appear on heresy charges.
(Meanwhile, Mr. Thomas Cranmer is attempting to figure things out at Cambridge while others, like Hamilton up north, were declaring in favor of Luther. Bp. John Fisher was doing the heavy-lifting for Henry VIII in their antagonisms to Luther.)

Hamilton runs abroad and lands in Wittenberg. He met Luther, Melancthon, and the English hero, William Tyndale, himself a fugitive from the Anglo-Italians in England. Hamilton wrote his "Common Places," affirming justification by faith alone. Hamilton returned to Scotland and began preaching.

In Jan 1528, Mr. (Abp) Beaton and other Scots-Italian bishops meet at St. Andrews University, summoning Hamilton again and preferring 13 charges of heresy against him.

He was tried and was burned the same day on 29 February 1528. It would only spark further discussion of Reformation theology in Scotland.

A few questions:

• If a Roman Catholic, what say you of this and the decrees of the Council of Trent that anathematized then—and as reaffirmed recently—against the doctrine of justification by faith alone? Have you developed a 10-page bibliography on justification by faith alone consisting of the best works on it? Or, has your priest done this?

• Why has Mr. (Bp) Robert Duncan, ACNA, never appeared to articulate, assert and defend this doctrine? In Article XI of the Thirty-nine Articles? Would a discussion here relate to other Reformed doctrines?

• What do Misters (Bps) Jack Iker, Keith Ackerman and others say of Articles IX-XI? What really are “their” views here?

• Do these matters get discussed in modern centers of advertisement? TBN? Daystar Television? Word Television? Rick Warren? Or others? If so, does Paul’s Epistle to the Romans feature in their ministries?

• Have worldwide Lutherans betrayed the Reformation understanding of justification by faith alone? See: http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2009/09/cyberbrethren-betraying-reformation-sad.html

• Has Mr. (Bp.) N.T. Wright erred here?

• What is one to say of the Federal Visionists and Mr. Norm Shepherd at Westminster Theological Seminary?

• If you are a secularist, what do you say of justification by faith alone? What homework have you done on this?

• Does modern TV, internet and other forms of media serve to obscure this doctrine?

• What’s the health and status of this doctrine? One might think denomination by denomination here. Aside from the catechetical memory work as lads, do you hear this clearly enunciated?

Romans 11:6

1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)

6 [a]And if it be of grace, it is [b]no more of works: or else were grace no more grace: but if it be of works, it is no more grace: or else were work no more work.

Footnotes:

a. Romans 11:6 Although that all be not elect and chosen, yet let them that are elected, remember that they are freely chosen, and let them that stubbornly refuse the grace and free mercy of God, impute it unto themselves.
b. Romans 11:6 This saying beateth down flat to the ground all the doctrine of all kinds and manner of works, whereby our justifiers of themselves do teach, that works are either wholly or partly the cause of our justification.

Dr. Rusten cites the following sources:

Douglas, J. D. “Hamilton, Patrick.” NIDCC. 449.
Hillyer, N. “Hamilton, Patrick.” WWCH. 301.
Torrence, I. R. “Hamilton, Patrick.” DSCHT. 390-1.

(3-Hr Video): Lamp in the Dark: Untold Story of the Bible

Dr. Daniell's "Bible in English:" (Ch. 15) Plain Style & Bible Reading

Daniell, David. The Bible in English: Its History and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Bible-English-History-Influence/dp/0300099304/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385668294&sr=8-1&keywords=david+daniell+english+bible

 
Chapter 15—ENGLISH PLAIN STYLE AND BIBLE READING, 248-274

Prof. Daniell moves in a side-direction, to wit, to demonstrate the influence of plain speech and plain speaking mediated through Tyndale’s Biblical influences (and the translational progeny).

He raises several issues: (1) 3 influential plain stylists, (2) influences on Tyndale, (3) Magdalen College Vulgaria, (4) Queen Mary, (5) Bible reading, (6) Bible reading by individuals, (7) Bible reading and a national resurgence, and (8) the arrival of English.

English was a “poor thing” spoken on a tiny island “off the shelf of Europe,” a language unknown in Europe and spoken by over 2 million Englanders (compared to our time…2 billion as the first languagers?). Thomas More, the viciously anti-Reformed Anglo-Italian, claimed that 2/3rds could read English in England. This may have been over-stated in order to fan the hostile flames of De Haeretico Comburendo. We know he was given to over-blown and highly exaggerated language, viciously and murderously so. Even one strongly committed Anglo-Italian ass, Nicholas Harpsfield, operating during Elizabeth’s time, felt More was over-the-top. We'll stick with Tyndale's term, "asses."

But, whatever the literacy rate was in England, Prof. Daniell warms to his theme again: “I argue that the switch was thrown” by the English Bible and Tyndale (248). Prof. Daniell appears to like the metaphor of “switch” or “power switch” for a power-line or turning on the lights on a national level.

England alone.

England was alone in not having a vernacular Bible. Prof. Daniell points to these vernacular Bibles from European presses: 1466—Germany, 1471—Italy, 1474—France, 1477—Dutch, 1478—Catalin, and before 1500—Spain and Portugal. These were not for the “swine” (an Anglo-Italian term of art for the laity) or public use, liturgy or homes. Nevertheless, there were 1000 presses in Europe compared to 3 in England—Caxton, de Worde, and Pynsson. These vernaculars were translated from the Latin text and for use by one licensed by an Italian-based senior ass.

Luther’s German Bible in 1522 was based on Erasmus’ 1516 Greek NT. We previously reviewed the stern, murderous and oppressive policy of the Anglo-Italian asses in England: (1) the Parliamentary Act of 1401, De Haeretico Comburendo, (2) the repressive canons of the 1407 Provincial Council of Oxford, and the (3) works of the Ass-bishop of Canterbury, Lord Arundel, with his 11 deadly Constitutions, adopted in Canterbury, York, Lambeth, Oxford and across the nation. It was directed at Wyclif and his poor preachers. England was alone and under the Anglo-Italian thumb.

But, on Prof. Daniell’s reading, “something was happening in the 1520s-1530s internationally, nationally and locally” (250). The printers in Antwerp were all too happy to collect the profits trading off an English appetite. The hunger was for the English Bible—with more print runs than the Aeneid or Iliad.

“Plain style.” Tyndale made efforts to avoid the “colours of rhetoric.” The Bible was for the “mass of ordinary men and women,” not for the “Neoplatonic courtly poets” of Elizabeth’s period (251).

Prof. Daniell offers several examples of the impact.

1. Thomas Hobbes was constantly defending his plain style (253).

2. Addison continually defended this style. He desired this:

“It was said of Socrates that he brought Philosophy down from Heaven, to inhabit among men; and I shall be ambitious to have it said of me, that I have brought philosophy out of Closets and Libraries, Schools and Colleges, to dwell in Clubs and Assemblies, at Tea-tables and in Coffee-houses” (253).

3. Samuel Johnson, an advocate of heavily-Latinized English, nevertheless concluded this—negatively but illustratively—about Addison:

“Whoever wishes to attain an English style, familiar but not coarse, and elegant but not ostentatious, must give his days and nights to the volumes of Addison” (253).

4. Bishop John Wilkins, a man with a colorful background, wrote of the need for plain style speech in Ecclesiastes or a Discourse concerning the Gift of Preaching, as it falls under the rules of Art: 

“…must be plain and natural, not being darkened with the affections of Scholastical harshness or Rhetorical flourishes. Obscurity in the discourse is an argument of ignorance in the mind. The greatest learning is to be seen in the greatest plainness. The more clearly we understand anything ourselves, the more easily can we expound it to others. When the notion itself is good, the best way to set it off is in the most obvious plain expression. St. Paul does often glory in this” (254).

We would add a few logs to this fire: (1) Cornelius Van Til’s densities will largely die with his few enthusiasts. He never learned to write with clarity. (2) Jean Calvin, Martin Luther, Guido de Bres, Zachary Ursinus, William Tyndale and Thomas Cranmer learned to write with clarity. (3) Hooker "was and is" a thicket so thick as to be virtually in-penetrable. (4) Even Owen, though dense, is understandable. (5) Bishop J.C. Ryle (one of the men we willingly call “Bishop”) observed that many of his colleagues were caught up in the Victorian efforts at rhetorical flourish and flair. As an Eton and Oxford man, he witnessed it. He vowed to do the opposite. The old master of Liverpool is ever-accessible and direct. (6) Or, we would add the Rev. Dr. Prof. Allen C. Gulezo who writes with clarity, wit, scholarship and insight—it communicates. While the scholarship is powerful, it is not lost through obfuscation. (7) Or, who can ever forget the inimitably dense, uncommunicative yet widely hailed brilliance of the former Canterbury, Rowan Williams, talkative but saying nothing notable? Awful stuff. No English fogs from the Channel please, at least not for Tyndale and Cranmer.

But, rather wildly and out-of-the-blue, Prof. Daniell observes that this plain style speech—even in the scientific community—held forth “until the nineteenth and twentieth centuries when Germanic-American obfuscation took over” (256). No evidence, just the claim. We’ll leave that there.

INFLUENCES ON TYNDALE, 256-258

Thomas More offered the jibe that “all England list now to go to school with Tyndale to learn English” (257). There is truth here for “many erstwhile illiterates did indeed go to school with Tyndale” (257).

For example, William Maldon of Chelmsford (about 40 miles to the NE of London, about 2 o'clock as the crow flies) spoke of the Sunday evening gatherings of poor men gathering to hear the “glad tidings” read. This itself led William himself to learn reading. It led him to buy, read, and treasure the NT. It also led to his father beating him and disputes with his mother about the English Bible. Prof. Daniell will have more to say later about Maldon.

Influences?

West Country speech patterns of Gloucestershire? Prof. Daniell thinks so, but believes more academic work is needed on a literary level. Numerous words need evaluation.

Prof. Daniell calls attention to William Langland’s Piers Ploughman written in the 1380s and just a few miles north of Tyndale’s birthplace in Gloucestershire. Yet while Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales was repeatedly published for courtly reading, Langland languished and was never printed…at least until 1550.

Prof. Daniell continues the discussion under his next rubric.

MAGDALEN COLLEGE VULGARIA, 258-263

Apparently, there was a “war of the grammarians.” Do we teach English grammar in English? In Latin? Do we teach Latin with Latin? If so, how? And who? Or, do we teach Latin using English? Tyndale had been at Magdalen Hall for 10 years while experiments and debates were to be had. Varied teaching books survive. The struggle was to translate “neither too high nor too low” (258).

Whatever the impact, Tyndale had a “registry of phrases just above the level of common speech” (258). This much, he was an exploratory connoisseur of words.

Prof. Daniell registers his familiar theme regarding Tyndale, Coverdale and the progeny of translations: “short, punchy Saxon forms,” clear and powerful verbs, and subject-verb-object forms. While Shakespeare never feared a good Latinized line, he often would alternate with a quick, punchy Saxon line in parallelistic clarification.

QUEEN MARY 1, 263-264

No English Bibles were printed during her reign (1553-1558). No surprises there. That was standard English policy from 1401 until Henry’s Great Bible, some 140 plus years. And even with its publication and distribution of the Great Bible with Cranmer's wonderful Preface, there were reversals, e.g. “pay and obey, but don’t read and think” in a few monumentally absurd proclamations by Henry and Parliament. Now, Cardinal Pole, an Anglo-Italian, had been out of country for 34 years. Mary recalled him. He advocated for the revival of the 1401 Act of De Haeretico Comburendo. Close to 300 were burned at the stake.

John Rogers was her first victim. Rogers was Tyndale’s friend, collaborator, and maker of the Thomas Matthew’s Bible (again, renamed as a theologico-political screen for Tyndale’s and Coverdale’s works and names). These were picked up by Henry as the Great Bible and it was now awash throughout the land. Rogers was burned at Smithfield on 11 FEB 1555. Prof. Daniell offers this quote:

“…with heroic fortitude. Even Catholic [=Anglo-Italians, not Reformed Catholics] opponents said so. The godly who had gathered wept and prayed God to give him courage to bear the pain and not to recant. Rogers’ ashes were collected, a martyr’s relics, and some seeing birds fly over as he expired thought this a sign of the Holy Ghost” (264).

Latimer, Ridley and Cranmer would be caught in the dragoons’ dragnets in the effort to extinguish God’s Gospel. The Anglo-Italian demons were roiling and raging.

800 Reformed Churchmen sailed the Channel to the Continent as fugitives and exiles for the Biblical faith, including some significant Biblical scholars. Mary’s policy did not extinguish the true faith nor did it advance the Anglo-Italian, Imperial or Roman-Vatican cause. The day of the English Bible had arrived and was to stay.

BIBLE READING, 264-268

Prof. Daniell will give portraits.

Richard Tracy, for example, wrote King Henry VIII in 1544. It is entitled A Supplication to our most Sovereign Lord King Henry VIII.  He argued that the Romanish conventicles [our word for them] had only been able to stand through the suppression of the vernacular Bibles. While the Great Bible was going into the 9000 national churches, Parliament had passed a proclamation warning that the “lower classes” were not to read the Bible” (264). But, the reality was outstripping Anglo-Italian imperialism. The Bible had seeped into the national life and was being read.

We return to the story of William Maldon of Chelmsford. A.W. Pollard, the Cranmer scholar, tells the story:

“…divers poor men of the town of Chelmsford in the county of Essex where my father dwelt and I born and with him brought up, the said poor men bought the New Testament of Jesus Christ and on Sundays did sit reading in the lower end of the church, and many would flock about them to hear their reading, then I came among the said readers to hear their reading of that glad tidings of the gospel, then my father seeing this that I listened to them every Sunday, then came he and sought me among them, and brought me away from the hearing of them and would have me say the Latin matins with him, the which grieved me very much, and thus did fetch me away divers times, then I see I could not be in rest, then I thought, I will learn to read English, and then I will have the New Testament and read thereon myself, and then I had learned of an English primer as far as patris sapientia and then on Sundays I plied my English primer, the Maytide following I and my father’s apprentice Thomas Jeffary laid our money together, and bought the New Testament in English, and hid it in our bedstraw and so exercised it at convenient times” (265).

A few self-evident observations: (1) The NT had surfaced in a parish 40 miles NE of London. (2) Sunday evenings were the occasion for the readings (following Latin-based services). (3) Apparently, many illiterates were gathered, but one amongst them could read. (4) Maldon was an illiterate, but resolved to learn to read English from a primer. (5) From the story, this was a continuing endeavor on his part. Reformed and Confessional Churchman call it the "due and ordinary means of grace." (6) The father was not pleased. (6) He buys a NT himself and “exercises” himself with/in it. Prof. Daniell refers to fights with his mother and father over it.

Prof. Daniell warms again to his frequent theme: many print-runs of the Tyndale, Coverdale Bibles and NTs for the English public, notwithstanding efforts to roll back the movement.

There is evidence for large assemblies doing this, which is, gathering for Bible reading. Some were so large that even Mary did not disrupt the practice: two notable illustrations come from a large parish in Bristol and one in London. It would appear that reading might occur provided there were no theological statements or reflections contrary to Anglo-Italian theology. But, the cat was out of the bag.

Here is one example of an assembly.

“We begin with prayer; after, read some one or two chapters of the Bible, give the sense thereof, and confer upon the same: that done, we lay aside our books, and after solemn prayer by the first speaker, he propoundeth some text out of the Scripture, and prophesieth [=teacheth, speaketh forth] out of the same by space of one hour or three quarters of an hour. After him standeth up a second speaker… [he is followed similarly by] the third, the fourth, the fifth, etc. as the time will give leave. Then the first speaker concludeth with prayer as he began with prayer, with an exhortation to contribution to the poor, which collection being made, is also concluded with a prayer. This morning exercise beginneth at eight of the clock and continueth until twelve of the clock. The like course and exercise is observed in the afternoon from two of the clock unto five or six of the clock. Last of all the business of the government of our church is handled” (267).

Unfortunately, Prof. Daniell does not date this record. This might be what Elizabeth had in mind regarding “prophesyings,” although the evidence for that appeared to be directed at Presbyters doing similarly. This appears to be a Congregationalist affair.

BIBLE REFERENCES BY INDIVIDUALS, 266-267

The Reformation was an “intellectual event” led by university men from the top of the academic food chain. It drew laymen into its orbit and gave them a new liberty. Many “ordinary people were bewildered…from their normal moorings” (267). But all the Reformers “wanted a nation of Bible readers” and for “all of England to be a university” in which “ploughboys and milkmaids sang the Scripture as they worked” (267). The Reformers did maintain the “authority of the Bible and control of its interpretation never more so than the Geneva Bible” (268), a note revealing Prof. Daniell's Dissenter roots.

Prof. Daniell returns to more illustrations of the commoner and the Bible.

1. Rawlins White of Cardiff, an illiterate fisherman, burned at the stake in 1555. Cardiff is about 150 miles from London and about 9 o'clock as the crow flies. The Bible was in a fisherman's home. He sent his son to school to learn to read English; they were Welsh-speakers. The boy read the English Bible at night. This indicates that the English Bible was to be had far outside London. The man became seriously literate—in terms of the readings—and was able to cite “chapter and leaf” (267).

2. John Maundrel was burned at Salisbury. Salisbury is about 90 miles from London at about 8 o'clock as the crow flies. He was illiterate too. But, he bought and owned a pocket-sized Tyndalian NT. He would ask anyone who could read to read to him. He too learned to cite and quote the Bible.

3. Joan Waste was a blind woman in Derby. Derby is about 130 miles from London at about 11 o'clock as the crow flies. She too bought a NT. She had others read it to her. She had sections memorized. She was burned at the stake in 1558.

4. Mrs. Prest of Exeter. Exeter is this scribe's ancestral home on mother's side. It is about 200 miles at about 8 o'clock as the crow flies. She was illiterate too, but attended readings and learned much by it. She was burned at the stake in Exeter in 1558.

5. A.G. Dickens in his English Reformation gives examples of youths who could read, did read, and were put to the stake.

Prof. Daniell again repeats his oft-made statement. Between 1536 (when Tyndale was strangled and roasted in Belgium) and 1549 (when the English Book of Common Prayer and English Bible were required in 9000 churches) was a meagre 13-14 years.

Despite the Anglo-Italian reversals of the 1540s, new forces were at work. Cranmer began studying liturgical example as his library at Lambeth reveals. He was absorbing Continental developments and scholarship. He chaired meetings at Windsor and Chertsey to review “phrasing and many other collects” (274).

To close off the chapter, Prof. Daniell offers two Cranmerian collects to show the force of the Saxon effort, the clear and direct language for use in national prayers:

1. The 21st Sunday After Trinity

“Grant we beseech thee, merciful Lord, to thy faithful people, pardon and peace: that they may be cleansed from all their sins, and serve thee with a quiet mind: through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

We would offer that Prayer Book doctrine and piety makes no room for the rampant noises of modern charismania or the free-wingers in worship. People kneel and beseech the divine mercies.

2. The 4th Sunday after Easter drawn from the 4th century Gelasian Sacramentary

“O Almighty God, who alone canst order the unruly wills and affections of sinful men: Grant unto thy people, that they many love the thing which thou commandest, and desire that which thou dost promise: that so, among the sundry and manifold changes of this world, our hearts may surely there be fixed, where true joys are to be found: through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

There are reasons to be a Reformed Prayer Book Churchman.

(Wiki) John Rogers: Collaborator in English Bible Translation & First Protestant Martry

From Wiki.

Mary's first martyr, the arch-heretic of the Reformation, John Rogers. His wife and 11 children attended the burning at the stake.

John Rogers (c. 1500 – 4 February 1555) was a clergyman, Bible translator and commentator, and the first English Protestant martyr under Mary I of England.

Contents

1 Biography of John Rogers 1.1 Early life
1.2 Antwerp and the Matthew Bible
1.3 Imprisonment and martyrdom

Biography of John Roger

Early life

Rogers was born in Deritend, an area of Birmingham then within the parish of Aston. His father was also called John Rogers and was a lorimer – a maker of bits and spurs – whose family came from Aston; his mother was Margaret Wyatt, the daughter of a tanner with family in Erdington and Sutton Coldfield.[3]

Rogers was educated at the Guild School of St John the Baptist in Deritend,[4] and at Pembroke Hall, Cambridge University, where he graduated B.A. in 1526.[5] Between 1532 and 1534 he was rector of Holy Trinity the Less in the City of London.[6]

Antwerp and the Matthew Bible

In 1534, Rogers went to Antwerp as chaplain to the English merchants of the Company of the Merchant Adventurers.

Here he met William Tyndale, under whose influence he abandoned the Roman Catholic faith, and married Antwerp native Adriana de Weyden (b. 1522, anglicised to Adrana Pratt in 1552) in 1537. After Tyndale's death, Rogers pushed on with his predecessor's English version of the Old Testament, which he used as far as 2 Chronicles, employing Myles Coverdale's translation (1535) for the remainder and for the Apocrypha. Although it is claimed that Rogers was the first person to ever print a complete English Bible that was translated directly from the original Greek & Hebrew, there was also a reliance upon a Latin translation of the Hebrew Bible by Sebastian Münster and published in 1534/5.

Tyndale's New Testament had been published in 1526. The complete Bible was put out under the pseudonym of Thomas Matthew in 1537; it was printed in Paris and Antwerp by Adriana's uncle, Sir Jacobus van Meteren. Richard Grafton published the sheets and got leave to sell the edition (1500 copies) in England. At the insistence of Archbishop Cranmer, the "King's most gracious license" was granted to this translation. Previously in the same year, the 1537 reprint of the Myles Coverdale's translation had been granted such a lic.

The pseudonym "Matthew" is associated with Rogers, but it seems more probable that Matthew stands for Tyndale's own name, which, back then, was dangerous to employ. Rogers had little to do with the translation; his own share in that work was probably confined to translating the prayer of Manasses (inserted here for the first time in a printed English Bible), the general task of editing the materials at his disposal, and preparing the marginal notes collected from various sources. These are often cited as the first original English language commentary on the Bible. Rogers also contributed the Song of Manasses in the Apocrypha, which he found in a French Bible printed in 1535. His work was largely used by those who prepared the Great Bible (1539–40), and from this came the Bishops' Bible (1568) and the King James Version.

Rogers matriculated at the University of Wittenberg on 25 November 1540, where he remained for three years, becoming a close friend of Philipp Melanchthon and other leading figures of the early Protestant Reformation.[7] On leaving Wittenberg he spent four and a half years as a superintendent of a Lutheran church in Meldorf, Dithmarschen, near the mouth of the River Elbe in the north of Germany.[8]

Rogers returned to England in 1548, where he published a translation of Philipp Melanchthon's Considerations of the Augsburg Interim.

In 1550 he was presented to the crown livings of St Margaret Moses and St Sepulchre in London, and in 1551 was made a prebendary of St. Paul's, where the dean and chapter soon appointed him divinity lecturer. He courageously denounced the greed shown by certain courtiers with reference to the property of the suppressed monasteries, and defended himself before the privy council. He also declined to wear the prescribed vestments, donning instead a simple round cap. On the accession of Mary he preached at Paul's Cross commending the "true doctrine taught in King Edward's days," and warning his hearers against "pestilent Popery, idolatry and superstition."

Rogers was also against radical Protestants. After Joan of Kent was imprisoned in 1548 and convicted in April 1549, John Foxe, one of the few Protestants opposed to burnings, approached Rogers to intervene to save Joan, but he refused with the comment that burning was “sufficiently mild” for a crime as grave as heresy.

Imprisonment and martyrdom

On 16 August 1553 he was summoned before the council and bidden to keep within his own house. His emoluments were taken away and his prebend was filled in October. In January 1554, Bonner, the new Bishop of London, sent him to Newgate Prison, where he lay with John Hooper, Laurence Saunders, John Bradford and others for a year. Their petitions, whether for less rigorous treatment or for opportunity of stating their case, were disregarded. In December 1554, Parliament re-enacted the penal statutes against Lollards, and on 22 January 1555, two days after they took effect, Rogers (with ten other people) came before the council at Gardiner's house in Southwark, and defended himself in the examination that took place. On 28 and 29 January he came before the commission appointed by Cardinal Pole, and was sentenced to death by Gardiner for heretically denying the Christian character of the Church of Rome and the real presence in the sacrament. He awaited and met death cheerfully, though he was even denied a meeting with his wife. He was burned at the stake on 4 February 1555 at Smithfield. Noailles, the French ambassador, speaks of the support given to Rogers by the greatest part of the people: "even his children assisted at it, comforting him in such a manner that it seemed as if he had been led to a wedding."

John Rogers, Vicar of St. Sepulchre's, and Reader of St. Paul's, London

The quotation that follows is from Foxe's Book of Martyrs, Chapter 16. However, it is included here because of its historical significance, being the vehicle by which the story of Rev. John Rogers has been most widely disseminated.

"John Rogers was educated at Cambridge, and was afterward many years chaplain to the merchant adventurers at Antwerp in Brabant. Here he met with the celebrated martyr William Tyndale, and Miles Coverdale, both voluntary exiles from their country for their aversion to popish superstition and idolatry. They were the instruments of his conversion; and he united with them in that translation of the Bible into English, entitled "The Translation of Thomas Matthew." From the Scriptures he knew that unlawful vows may be lawfully broken; hence he married, and removed to Wittenberg in Saxony, for the improvement of learning; and he there learned the Dutch language, and received the charge of a congregation, which he faithfully executed for many years. On King Edward's accession, he left Saxony to promote the work of reformation in England; and, after some time, Nicholas Ridley, then bishop of London, gave him a prebend in St. Paul's Cathedral, and the dean and chapter appointed him reader of the divinity lesson there. Here he continued until Queen Mary's succession to the throne, when the Gospel and true religion were banished, and the Antichrist of Rome, with his superstition and idolatry, introduced.

The circumstance of Mr. Rogers having preached at Paul's cross, after Queen Mary arrived at the Tower, has been already stated. He confirmed in his sermon the true doctrine taught in King Edward's time, and exhorted the people to beware of the pestilence of popery, idolatry, and superstition. For this he was called to account, but so ably defended himself that, for that time, he was dismissed. The proclamation of the queen, however, to prohibit true preaching, gave his enemies a new handle against him. Hence he was again summoned before the council, and commanded to keep to his house. He did so, though he might have escaped; and though he perceived the state of the true religion to be desperate. He knew he could not want a living in Germany; and he could not forget a wife and ten children, and to seek means to succor them. But all these things were insufficient to induce him to depart, and, when once called to answer in Christ's cause, he stoutly defended it, and hazarded his life for that purpose.

After long imprisonment in his own house, the restless Bonner, bishop of London, caused him to be committed to Newgate, there to be lodged among thieves and murderers.

After Mr. Rogers had been long and straitly imprisoned, and lodged in Newgate among thieves, often examined, and very uncharitably entreated, and at length unjustly and most cruelly condemned by Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, the fourth day of February, in the year of our Lord 1555, being Monday in the morning, he was suddenly warned by the keeper of Newgate's wife, to prepare himself for the fire; who, being then sound asleep, could scarce be awaked. At length being raised and awaked, and bid to make haste, then said he, "If it be so, I need not tie my points." And so was had down, first to bishop Bonner to be degraded: which being done, he craved of Bonner but one petition; and Bonner asked what that should be. Mr. Rogers replied that he might speak a few words with his wife before his burning, but that could not be obtained of him.

When the time came that he should be brought out of Newgate to Smithfield, the place of his execution, Mr. Woodroofe, one of the sheriffs, first came to Mr. Rogers, and asked him if he would revoke his abominable doctrine, and the evil opinion of the Sacrament of the altar. Mr. Rogers answered, "That which I have preached I will seal with my blood." Then Mr. Woodroofe said, "Thou art an heretic." "That shall be known," quoth Mr. Rogers, "at the Day of Judgment." "Well," said Mr. Woodroofe, "I will never pray for thee." "But I will pray for you," said Mr. Rogers; and so was brought the same day, the fourth of February, by the sheriffs, towards Smithfield, saying the Psalm Miserere by the way, all the people wonderfully rejoicing at his constancy; with great praises and thanks to God for the same. And there in the presence of Mr. Rochester, comptroller of the queen's household, Sir Richard Southwell, both the sheriffs, and a great number of people, he was burnt to ashes, washing his hands in the flame as he was burning. A little before his burning, his pardon was brought, if he would have recanted; but he utterly refused it. He was the first martyr of all the blessed company that suffered in Queen Mary's time that gave the first adventure upon the fire. His wife and children, being eleven in number, ten able to go, and one sucking at her breast, met him by the way, as he went towards Smithfield. This sorrowful sight of his own flesh and blood could nothing move him, but that he constantly and cheerfully took his death with wonderful patience, in the defence and quarrel of the Gospel of Christ."

Notes

1.Jump up ^ Chester 1861, p. 1
2.Jump up ^ Daniell 2004
3.Jump up ^ Hill 1907, pp. 5–6
4.Jump up ^ Hill 1907, p. 4
5.Jump up ^ "Rogers, John". A Cambridge Alumni Database. University of Cambridge.
6.Jump up ^ Chester 1861, pp. 3–5
7.Jump up ^ Daniell 2003, p. 191
8.Jump up ^ Daniell 2003, p. 191

References

Wikimedia Commons has media related to John Rogers (Bible editor and martyr).

Chester, Joseph Lemuel (1861), John Rogers: the Compiler of the First Authorised English Bible, London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, OCLC 257597540, retrieved 2009-02-14
Daniell, David (2003), The Bible in English, Yale University Press, ISBN 0-300-09930-4
Daniell, David (2004), "Rogers, John (c.1500–1555)", Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Online ed.), Oxford University Press, retrieved 2009-02-14
Hill, Joseph (1907), The book makers of old Birmingham; authors, printers, and book sellers, Birmingham: Printed at the Shakespeare Press for Cornish Bros., OCLC 3773421

Dr. Daniell's "Bible in English:" Coverdale's 1535 Bible

Daniell, David. The Bible in English: Its History and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003. http://www.amazon.com/The-Bible-English-History-Influence/dp/0300099304/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385668294&sr=8-1&keywords=david+daniell+english+bible

Thus far.

PART 1: BEFORE PRINTING: (1) Bible in Britain to AD 850, (2) Anglo-Saxon Bibles, (3) Wycliff (“Lollard”) Bibles and (4) Anglo-Italian repressions—14th-15th centuries.

PART 2: AFTER PRINTING: (1) Erasmus’ Greek NT and those proliferating “pestiferous” and “poisonous” vernaculars that induce “heresy,” (2) the English Reformation (3) William Tyndale, the “arch-heretic,” (4) Continued Anglo-Italian opposition from Henry VIII, Parliament, Canterbury, London and elsewhere despite the growingly influential reformist movement, and (5) Coverdale’s Bible, 1535.

Here at Chapter 11: Coverdale’s Bible, 1535, pages 173-189, our notes on Prof. Daniell’s comments with interpolated musings.

1000s of copies of Tyndale’s NT had an “eager reception” and the “mood was changing.” The Anglo-Italian bishops were “seriously alarmed” (173). “Heresy was abroad and spreading” being conducted by a “gang of organized, professional malcontents…plotting outside England…using the latest technology” (173). Stephen Gardiner, Winchester, wrote in 1546, “…each man with an English Bible to be a church alone.” Or, Richard Nix of Norwich, complaining of the NT readers, “…if they continue any time I think they shall undo us all” (173). Vernacular Bibles—verboten.

Yet, Foxe reprinted a 1531 note by Tyndale that couldn’t be starker or more vivid in contrast to the Anglo-Italian policy:

“Of these foresaid authorities it is proved lawful, that both men and women lawfully may read and write God’s law in their mother-tongue, and they that forfend [= avert, keep away, prevent as cautionary measures] this…they show themselves…the very disciples of Antichrist…in stopping and perverting of God’s law…” (170).

Christ v. Antichrist? Both sides believed they were on Christ’s side and the other side, well, as for Tyndale, from the Anglo-Italian viewpoint, he was a “son of perdition” meriting the purgative flames. Rome won the battle but lost—big time—in the war. Before the funeral-pyres in 1536, however, Tyndale returns the attribution: the Anglo-Italian bishops are “disciples of Antichrist.” Strong stuff! GAME ON!

In Chapter 10, we noted Cranmer’s effort for the “Bishops’ Bishop,” 1534. He met with stonewalling and, in one instance (Stokesley of London), an outright and in-your-face rebuttal. They were busy, you know, with other things. It reminds us of Tunstall’s famed claim in 1524ish that there “was no room in the palace [=Lambeth] for a Bible translation.” No room at the Bethlehem Inn for Jesus.

By 1542, Richard Grafton wrote to Cromwell about the alleged promise by the bishops to produce a corrected version of Tyndale. (We also cited Cranmer’s letter of resignation in 1537 to Cromwell that he expected action from the Bishops a day after doomsday.) Grafton writes, “…it is now seven years, since the Bishops promised to translate and set forth the Bible, and as of yet they have no leisure” (173). The Anglo-Italian bishops were going nowhere fast and they liked it that way. If they had their way, they would put it in reverse. But the printing juggernaut was still rolling...hot and productive presses including Coverdale’s 1535 Bible, the first Bible in its entirety in English.

THE FIRST COMPLETE PRINTED BIBLE IN ENGLISH, 174.

Coverdale labored abroad. His Bible was the first complete Bible in English. It contained the OT, NT and, in between, the Apocrypha. It had 2 columns, light annotations, and 150 illustrations. It became the “head” of a stream—no, a flood—of versions to come in the 16th and 17th centuries…into the Great Bible of 1539, the Genevan versions, the Bishops’ Bible, and the KJV.

The second half of the OT was Coverdale’s, the books that Tyndale had not completed. Remember, Tyndale was arrested in spring 1535. He was in jail until his death by burning on 6 OCT 1536. Fortunately, the OT workups had been in John Roger’s hands while the Imperialists arrested Tyndale and confiscated Tyndale’s property, books and papers in Antwerp. The relationship between what Rogers held and what Coverdale produced is not entirely clear. But, Coverdale presses forward. While Tyndale was in jail, the first English Bible was rolling off the presses in 1535. So far as we know, he never saw a Coverdale Bible.

THE TITLE PAGE, 174-176

The Coverdale Bible was big, weighty, in folio-form and with black letters. Tyndale’s NTs as well as books had been pocket-size, handy and portable—and easy to smuggle into ports and hide in bales of hay. This volume, however, was big.

The title page carried an iconic picture by Hans Holbein. It featured Henry VIII as a “powerful Reformation monarch” (175), precisely what he was not. Henry was a 2.0 version of Anglicanism—Anglo-Italianism but without a Pope.

We have 5 versions for the 16th century Church of England:

• 1.0 version = Anglo-Italian with a Pope (Henrician),

• 2.0 version = Anglo-Italian without a Pope but undergoing changes that give rise to the 3.0 version (Henrician),

• 3.0 version = Anglo-Reformational and Reformed (Edwardian-Cranmerian),

• 4.0 version = Anglo-Italian with a Pope Again, a reiteration of 1.0 (Marian), and

• 5.0 = Anglo-Reformational (Elizabethan).

Henry may have tossed the Pope, but he was still an Anglo-Italian on other essentials of Rome like many neo-Anglo-Italian Tractarians of the 19th century.

But, this iconic title page may have represented some hopeful wishing. Or, perhaps flattery. Or, perhaps, an effort at persuasion. It would have played to Henry’s England-sized ego of about 58,000 square miles. And, later, similar appeals to Elizabeth’s and James’s egos and sense of royalist entitlement, features of Tudor and Stuart kings.

COVERDALE’S EARLIER LIFE, 176-178

He was born in York, c. 1488. He was Cranmer’s junior by five years and Tyndale’s senior by six years. He was ordained in Norwich. He became an Augustinian friar and went to the Augustinian house at Cambridge [obviously they didn’t teach the friars Greek and Hebrew, because Coverdale never learned them…he was no Tyndale].

Coverdale came under the influence of Robert Barnes (later burned). Barnes “read openly in the house Paul’s Epistles” (176). Coverdale was “converted wholly unto Christ.” (Also, of note, Coverdale did take a degree from Cambridge.) Barnes preached in London, Christmas Eve, 1525. He was arrested by Wolsey, an Anglo-Italian Cardinal. Coverdale heard the sermon and participated in Barnes’ defense.

Clearly, Coverdale was, without changes, headed for conflict with the Anglo-Italians.

As for the overview for Coverdale’s life, John Bale, the English historian, wrote 20 years after Coverdale’s life at Cambridge:

“Under the mastership of Robert Barnes he drank in good learning with a burning thirst. He was a young man of friendly and upright nature and a very gentle spirit, and when the church of England revived, he was one of the first to make a pure profession of Christ…; he gave himself wholly to propagating the truth of Jesus Christ’s gospel and manifesting his glory…the spirit [sic] of God…is in some a vehement wind, overturning mountains and rocks, but in him it is a still small voice comforting wavering hearts. His style is charming and gentle, flowing limpidly along: it moves and instructs and delights” (177).

In 1527, he appears to still be in England. He writes Cromwell that he wants more books oriented to Scriptures. New winds were blowing in the universities; as previously noted, the English Reformation was initially powered by university men along with the recovery of the Scriptures. Coverdale reflects that shift. Tyndale, 1528, writing from the Continent, Obedience of the Christian Man, gave his scathing remarks about the absence of Biblical studies in the theological curricula at Oxford “without even a glimpse of even a word of Scripture” (reflecting his experience 10 years before Coverdale’s).

1528 is not clear. He preached a sermon in Lent, 1528, “in the habit of a secular priest” (meaning he had left the Augustinian house), and preached against transubstantiation, image-worship and auricular confession. By 1528, he also fled overseas. He’s 40 years old at this point, a mature man; Cranmer is 45.

1528—1535. The events are not clear, but he was on the Continent, away from the persecutions of Anglo-Romanists. Foxe in his Acts and Monuments puts him in Hamburg, 1529, at Tyndale’s invitation to assist his work on the Pentateuch.

During this period, we get Foxe’s rehearsal of Tyndale’s shipwreck off the coast of Holland in transit from Hamburg to Antwerp. He lost all his academic work, but not his life. Tyndale had to start over with the Pentateuch.

COVERDALE IN ANTWERP, 179-181

Coverdale is in Antwerp in the first part of the 1530s. Tyndale had been in or around Antwerp from 1528ish to 1535. Martin de Keyser was his printer in a city full of successful printers. On 1 street, there were 60 printers. Fine Dutch and French Bibles were being produced. So was Tyndale’s NTs and books. After Tyndale’s demise, Coverdale’s 1535 Bible, Antwerp is the city whence John Roger’s made the “Thomas Matthew’s Bible” in 1537. The latter was a renaming of the Tyndale-Coverdale work—they were heretics, so an innocuous title, “Thomas Matthew’s Bible” (after two NT disciples) was picked.

Coverdale’s Bible, 1535, was definitely printed in Antwerp. Tyndale was arrested and in jail by spring 1535. Coverdale, apparently, was also doing work as a “proof-reader” as well.

The whole Bible was printed 4 OCT 1535 while Tyndale languished in the Vilvoorde prison, outside Brussels.

The whole Bible in English. This is what all the European reformers advocated. “All the reformers across Europe, insisted that the Scriptures should be taken whole, not in measured droplets” (180). They were not cherry-pickers.

While this went to press, one must not lose sight of the on-going prints of the English NT. It was dominating the markets. Between 1537 and 1540, notwithstanding all the opposition from the Anglo-Italians on the home turf, the NT was printed 9 times by 3 different printers. Henry and his bishops could stomp their feet as much as they liked. They were being purchased and read on the home turf.

The ethos and spirit of the entire movement was summarized by Coverdale in his dedicatory epistle:

“Go to now, most dear reader, and sit thee down at the Lord’s feet and read his words, and…take them into thine heart, and let thy talking and communication be of them when thou sittest in thy house, or goest by the way, when thou liest down and when thou risest up…in whom [God] if thou put thy trust, and be an unfeigned reader or heart of his word with thy heart, thou shalt find sweetness therein and spy wondrous things to thy understanding, to the avoiding of all seditious sects, to the abhorring of thy old sinful life, and to the establishing of thy godly conversations” (188).

Martin Holt Dotterweich commented on Coverdale’s new annotations in the 1537 NT (again, printed abroad and imported to England):

“While Tyndale and Rogers [in Matthew’s Bible] especially have been accused of writing polemical notes, a reading of their margins displays few such annotations; rather, the notes consist primarily of lexical explanations or comparison of a difficult passage to others which explain it, albeit with an identifiably Protestant slant. The same is entirely true of Coverdale…[who] took about half his notes from Luther’s 1536 Bible, usually translating them straight into English…The other half are difficult to identify, and many probably come from Coverdale’s own hand as he attempted to anticipate the points over which his readers might stumble” (189).

It seems like Henry VIII was channeling the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar’s persistent obtuseness. The Babylonian king learned of God’s sovereignty amongst men and nations, to wit, that no one can stop or stay God’s hand. Nebster had to learn the hard way.

Daniel 4.34-35: “And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth forever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation: and all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?”

The Anglo-Italians had issued their views, books and proclamations, including old Henry.

God plans were different. God's, of course, prevailed.

Dr. Daniell's "Bible in English:" (1530s) Anglo-Italian Oppositon Continued

Daniell, David. The Bible in English: Its History and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Bible-English-History-Influence/dp/0300099304/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385668294&sr=8-1&keywords=david+daniell+english+bible

Prof. Daniell has offered up a review of: (1) the significant influence of Erasmus’ Greek NT in the Continent-wide flood of vernacular Bibles translated from the Greek and brought into visibility, (2) the weighty impact of the English Bible for the English Reformation, and (3) the life of Tyndale and his impact. In chapter 10, he turns the attention to Chapter 10, “After Tyndale.”

One sees a shift from the strict Anglo-Italian view—no vernaculars for the churches towards a more reforming direction. Nevertheless, opposition remains—unsurprisingly given that idols were falling.

Prof Daniell reviews: (1) the changing landscape in the Church of England, (2) the continuing opposition, (3) Thomas Cranmer’s projected but frustrated “Bishop’s Bible, and (4) more continued opposition. 

The theme of the chapter: THE BATTLE CONTINUES IN ENGLAND.

Prof. Daniell, probably to the annoyance of some historians, claims that the “revolution and its permanence” [in England] would not have happened “without Tyndale” (160). For our side, we are inclined to advocate for an adjusted narrative on the English Reformation: Tyndale has been under-rated, under-appreciated and, along with Erasmus, less visible than should be the case; Tyndale may overshadow Cranmer himself…although he played his part when allowed.

Thomas More, the strenuous voice of Anglo-Italianism, saw that by 1529 there was a “demand for the Bible in English” (160). More already evinces a slight shift, perhaps unwillingly, in his Dialogue Concerning Heresies. At this point, Cranmer is ensconced at Cambridge sorting through affairs as a scholar and assessing Mr. (senior Anglo-Italian clerk) John Fisher’s works. Meanwhile, Erasmus’ NT is in several editions and Continental vernaculars are afoot.

Tyndale’s editions have entered the nation. More argues that certain books or parts of certain books be screened and translated; it still is an argument against the entire Bible in the vernacular; it still shows More’s fear of the whole Bible.

Anglo-Italian Fears of the Bible in England:

1. The evil heretics, as they were called, by-passed the Latin Vulgate, used Erasmus’ Greek NT, used the Hebrew, and “disobeyed” the Church (161).

2. The evil heretics put forward 66 books (and apocrypha); horrors! They might read Romans and the Pauline epistles!

3. Furthermore, these evil heretics put the Bible into the “vernacular.” This meant that anyone, any man, any woman or even any child or youth might read the Bible themselves, if literate. Or, it might mean that anyone—irrespective of age or gender—might have the Bible read to them, if not literate. Or, it might mean anyone “within earshot” could hear the Bible (161). And, to the Anglo-Italians, God forbid that Bible-reading in the vernacular would be had in the 9000 parishes of England! Horrors no! The Bible was too sacred, defended, dangerous, complex and difficult—it was beyond understanding. No one could interpret it without the mediation of the controlling hierarchy; they feared a “free-for-all,” a very “present hell of heretics destroying the Christian heritage…full of heresy and seething sedition” (161). That fear was certainly not Chrysostom’s view of advocacy for Biblical literacy...nor a host of other Churchmen.

4. The evil heretics allowed for the “principle of self-interpretation to operate” (161). But quite notably, Catholic (= not Roman, but Reformed and Reformational) Churchmen never denied Biblical “dark places,” e.g. Geneva notes. Who would deny that Revelation has its manifold challenges? Or, that certain biblical texts had numerous challenges? Or, that certain poetical sections presented more challenges?

But, the Bible was, on the whole and in the main, perspicuous.

One is well-reminded by the sage statements of The Westminster Confession of Faith, albeit later, Chap. 1, para 7, 8.

“1.7. All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.

“1.8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as in all controversies of religion the Church is finally to appeal unto them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God who have right unto, and interest in, the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.

This was flatly denied by Rome and Anglo-Italians in England before Tyndale.

Of course, this would and did unleash varieties of understandings. Prof. Daniell notes: “Worse, as with Shakespeare, readers can find in the volume whatever they want” (161). But, when read, the Bible is both challenging yet simple too.

Prof. Daniell does a service by repeatedly returning to attempts to get the arms around the issue of print-runs and editions published. In the 16th century alone, the figures “are grand enough” he tells us (162). In the 18th-19th centuries, there were 1200 editions of the Bible, largely KJV; put differently, assuming even-ness over 200 years, we would do the math. That means over the 18th and 19th centuries, that 60 editions published per year.

By the 19th century, Pope Pee-on-us, or Pope Pee-on-everybody, Pee-on-the-people, or officially named Pope Pius IX, was declaiming and railing against vernacular Bibles in the 1864 Syllabus of Errors; the difference between Protestant England (minus the neo-Anglo-Italian Tractarians) and Romanism could not be starker. It would not be until Vatican II (1962-65) that Romanism would begin putting English services and English lections before English-speaking Romanists still under the Italian thumb.

As an aside, this explains a Roman priest assaulting this scribe and confiscating his English Bible in the narthex of a synagogue of darkness in/about 1960. We’ve covered that story elsewhere.

Continuing Prof. Daniell’s astute item of print-runs, he states it is “impossible to calculate the numbers running into the millions” of English Bibles.

In America, between 1777 and 1850, there were 1400 editions of the English Bible (162). Let us do the math. Again, assuming evenness per annum, that is 19.1 editions published each year. Prof. Daniell notes that 34 editions were printed in 1850 alone. Yes, millions of Bibles came from the Protestant presses.

By 1880, English Bibles were an “essential item in the furnishing of the American home.” It has been a “phenomenon beyond calculation.”

CONTINUED OPPOSITION IN THE 16TH CENTURY, 163—165

Tyndale continued to be a bogey-man in England--the pestiferous and poisonous heretic to use Ango-Italian terms of art. Henry VIII’s 1526 Preface in his famous letter denounced Luther as a man “who fell in device with one or two lewd person born in this our realm [= Tyndale and Roy]…for translating of the New Testament into English.” Henry promised, based on Prelatical counsel, to “burn Tyndale’s book and sharply punish its readers” (163). These were “false and erroneous translations and corruptions.” Never mind that 83% of Tyndale would be taken up into the KJV by 1611. This 1526 letter by Henry VIII would earn Henry the approval of the senior priest in Rome. Henry, defending his Anglo-Italian policy of supporting Italianism, would be called by the Pope Fidei Defensor, or “F.D.,” still on all British coins to this day. History has entirely turned over the Anglo-Italian and Italian policy, entirely.

Henry VIII’s moves tally with Thomas More's sustained vituperations. Henry convened an Assembly of divines on 24 MAY 1530. Tunstall, Gardiner, More and Canterbury Warham, all staunch Anglo-Italians were on hand; Latimer was there too and we are not sure of his reformist development at this point although some reports put him inside the circle of the White Horse Inn. Nevertheless, the conclusion of the Assembly was that “the people had no right to demand vernacular Scripture; it was not necessary for Christian men to have it; it could only work harm and the prelates do well in refusing it.”

Oh how obtuse and stupid were these Anglo-Italians.

In JUN 1530, old Harry issued a “Proclamation,” to wit:

1. “Damning erroneous books and heresies”

2. “Prohibiting the having of holy scripture [sic] translated into the vernacular tongues of English, French or Duche" [= German]

3. Five books are forbidden—by John Frith (later burned in 1533), Simon Fish, and Tyndale (including Wicked Mammon and Obedience)

CRANMER’S PROJECTED BISHOPS’ BIBLE, 1534, 165-167

Cranmer becomes Canterbury on 30 MAR 1533. ABC  Warham had departed to the next world. On Cranmer's part, a “fresh attempt” for a vernacular is made. A Convocation of Canterbury occurs in autumn, 1533. Significant attention is focused on “heresy” and “English books flooding in from overseas” (165).

On 19 DEC 1534, the Upper House directed Cranmer in these directions:

1. Approach the King seeking him to “order people” to turn in the Bibles and books within 3 months.

2. Ask the King to authorized learned men to translate the Holy Scriptures into English and deliver the Bibles for instruction from it. This sounds like an advance or shift; it also reflects a response to growing demand notable in England but also the Continent.

3. Ask the King to issue “an order” curbing the “presumption of laymen to dispute on faith or Scripture” (165). There was no freedom of religion and freedom of speech as we know it. On the other hand, this reflects realities on the ground and fears within the Anglo-Italian circles of leadership.

Cranmer proposed a “Bishops’ Bible” be brought forward by the Bishops. He partitions the Bible into 10 parts “to revise and correct” Tyndale. This clearly indicates that Cranmer was aware of Tyndale’s operations, achievements and views. Bp. Gardiner, ever hostile to the idea of an English Bible, did his part, finishing Luke and John. But, here is Bp. Stokesley’s response (as captured by Ralph Morice, the secretary to Cranmer):

“It chanced that the Acts of the Apostles were [sic] sent to bishop Stokesley to oversee and correct, then Bishop of London. When the day came, every man had sent to Lambeth [London] their parts correct: only Stokesley’s portion wanted. My lord Canterbury [= Cranmer] wrote to the Bishop letters for his part, requiring to deliver them the bringer thereof, his secretary [=Morice]. Bishop Stokesley being at Fullham received the letters, unto which he made this answer; I marvel what my lord of Canterbury meaneth that thus abuseth the people in giving them liberty to read the scriptures, which doth nothing but infect them with heresies. I have bestowed never an hour upon my portion, nor never will. And therefore my lord shall have his book again, for I will never be guilty to bring the simple people into error.
"My lord of Canterbury’s servant [= Morice] took the book [=Acts], and brought the same to Lambeth unto my lord, declaring my lord of London’s [Stokesley's] answer. When my lord [= Cranmer] had perceived that the Bishop had done nothing therein, I [= Cranmer] marvel, quod my lord of Canterbury, that my lord of London is so forward, that he will not do as other men do. Mr. Lowney stood by, hearing my lord speak so much of the Bishop’s untowardness, said:

"I [= Lowney] can tell your grace why my lord of London will not bestow any labour or pain this way. Your Grace knoweth well (quod Lowney) that his portion is a piece of the New Testament. And then he being persuaded that Christ had bequeathed him nothing in his testament thought it mere madness to bestow any labour or pain where no gain was to be gotten. And besides this, it is the Acts of the Apostles, which were simple poor fellows, and therefore my lord of London disdained to have to do with any of their acts" [emphasis added, 170]

A few evident observations on Stokesley’s worldview: (1) a vernacular Bible abuses the people, (2) the vernacular Bible infects the people with heresy, (3) based on these two things, he will not, he believes, lead the people into error, and (4) Lowney, being more practical, sees Stokesley as interested in gain and disinterested in apostles, those “simple poor fellows.” This--Stokesley--from the senior priest in the Anglo-Italian diocese of London in 1535; this view prevailed well in the 1970s for Romanists.

Upshot: Cranmer’s “Bishops’ Bible,” with excellent intentions, was frustrated (167). Cramner is always credited as being a man of patience; he had no other choice; either that or to the flames you go.

Two years later, 1537, Cranmer wrote Thomas Cromwell praising Matthew’s Bible [= Tyndale’s with a different title page] and begging that the King might license it until such time that “we bishops shall set forth a better translation, which I think will not be til a day after doomsday” (167).

A few self-evident observations on Cranmer in this letter to Cromwell: (1) Cranmer is aware of obstructionism, (2) Anglo-Italianism prevails amongst many bishops, (3) Cranmer endorsed a vernacular Bible, (4) if Tyndale was unacceptable, a revised Bible was needed, and (5) Cranmer is willing to employ sarcasm for bishops. Hah, bishops still deserve correction although they don't often respond to much of it...even when legitimate.

On 16 NOV 1538, the Anglo-Italian policy continued. Henry tried to stop the “import of naughty books from abroad” (169). Books from abroad were to be examined. No imports to England from abroad could be vernacular Bibles and no annotations.

In 1543, Parliament forbad “all translations bearing the name of Tyndale.”

Parliament further directed that all existing translations have the marginal notes and prologues be obliterated. The Bible Society holds 1 copy of the 1537 Matthew’s Bible with its prologues and notes—they were manually “inked over” in an act response to Parliament. The same Parliament decreed:

“At the same time it was enacted that no women (except noble or gentle women) no artificers, apprentices, journeymen, serving-men, husbandmen, or labourers should read to themselves or to others, publicly or privately, any part of the Bible under pain of imprisonment."

There years later (1546) the king repeated the prohibition against Tyndale’s books with many others…Thus the Great Bible alone remained unforbidden” (170).

The Great Bible had been ordered up for all 9000 parishes. However, no one could read it, privately or publicly. Hands off! It appears that the ground has shifted and this, a stop-gap, was a response to a growing readership. Fear was gripping the Anglo-Italian leaders amongst some Royals, Parliamentarians, and clerks.

But, God had other plans and no King of England could stay the Divine Hand.

Also, more proof that a nation and churches can be staffed by fools. Like then, like now.

Canadian Navy, WW2: The English Bible Goes to Sea

A Canadian Frigate, WW2

The English Bible went to sea in Elizabeth's day with Drake and Raleigh.  Two Sabbath services per day aboard Her Majesty's ships.  It also went to sea in WW2 with the Canadian Navy.  But first, some background.

Throughout the nation in the pre-Reformation period in England, the parishioner would hear a priest “murmuring in Latin at a distant altar [DPV: throw in a rood screen to keep the raffish swine enthralled and fenced out] with his back to the people” (121).

By contrast, in post-Reformation England, the minister faced the congregation, addressed them in English, read 3ish lessons from the English Bible, said or sang English Psalms, and, in their close midst, delivered an English sermon about the Bible—while the people prayed together in the English Collects, the English Lord’s Prayer, the English versicles and canticles, and confessed their common faith in the English Creeds. Oh yes, none of the 1928 (American) Tractated stuff with the "altar" and priests with backs to the people. Cranmer would have none of that. The Table replaced an altar and was placed amongst the people. Imagine the simplicity and sincerity of that, to use two words that Paul used with the super-apostles [think Tractoes] of Corinth. Quite a contrast.

Or, the poor chaps in the 9000 parishes of pre-Reformation England would hear their cleric say, Petite, et dabitur vobis; querite et invenetis; pulsate et aperiteur vobis.   

(By way of brief digression, 150 Latin plays were done at Cambridge and Oxford between 1550 and 1650.  Latin was certainly allowed, including Latin services for the collegiate and Cathedral churches.  But, this was for scholars, not the rank-and-file who were Latin-illiterate. Rather, 9000 English parishes got the English Bible. ) 

By contast, the 9000 parishes in post-Reformation England heard in a ringing, loud and clear voice: “Ask and it shall be given to you; seek and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you.” Significant on a national, or, macroscopic, level. England would be awash with English Bibles. After Tyndale squeezed the toothpaste from the tube with his 1526 NT, Mary (1553-1558, mercifully short) and all her Queen's men including the murderous Archbishop of Canterbury couldn't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

Even more remotely, but indicatively, ships in Her Majesty’s Royal Navy (Elizabeth's for Americans not knowing English history), during Raleigh’s and Drake’s travels would have two divine services per Sabbath—with the old English BCP, English Bible lections and English Psalm-singing. Yet, many modern historians appear to not be concerned about these matters. What’s up with that?

Causes me to reflect on Dad's service with His Majesty's Royal Canadian Navy, WW2, 42-46,' fighting German U-boats in the North Atlantic between Halifax, NS and Liverpool, UK. "I went to sea as a boy and came back a man." HMCS New Waterford and HMCS ______, a corvette and frigate. Can't remember the name of the frigate. Dad, as well as other men, thought very highly of their Anglican Chaplain. Again, all the divine services for the Canadians were in English and were in good, orderly and sober Anglican fashion. Furthermore, individuals possessed English Bibles. Imagine that!  The English Bibles went to sea.

NO MINOR ISSUE, BUT A MAJOR ONE although neglected and denied by revisionists. English Bibles, not Latin mumblings. 

While Romanists continued to mutter Latin to their (generally) Latin-illiterate parishioners until 1965ish and after, the English Bible went to sea with the Canadians in WW2.  Ditto for the Sailors of the Royal Navy too. Come to think of it and to be inclusive, ditto for U.S. Marines and Sailors in WW2 not under the imperialistic thumb of an Italian bishop in Rome.

Lest we forget!

 

Prof. Daniell's "Bible in English:" Ch. 7--Erasmus

Erasmus (1466-1536)
Painted by
Hans Holbein, 1523

Daniell, David.  The Bible in English: Its History and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003. http://www.amazon.com/The-Bible-English-History-Influence/dp/0300099304/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385668294&sr=8-1&keywords=david+daniell+english+bible

Chapter 7, “The Greek New Testament of Erasmus, 1516, and After (pages 113-119): After Erasmus, England Couldn't Put the Toothpaste Back in the Tube.

We come now to the period “after printing,” specifically the influence of the Greek NT of Erasmus in 1516.  We had discussed the Bible in Britain from its earliest times to AD 850, the Anglo-Saxon Bible and “glosses” (inter-linears to teach the Latin-illiterate people), the Wyclif (“Lollard”) Bibles and the strenuously hostile environment in England against Wyclif, his Bible and his theology—the hostility as a direct and enduring (130-plus years) result of Wycliff.  The Parliament and Canterbury put the screws to the English nation and churches.  However, Erasmus was “a motor” of the revolution.  So was William Tyndale who worked from Erasmus’ NT, but back now to Erasmus.

Erasmus was integral to European vernaculars coming into a “Continent-wide flood that should be properly called the Reformation” (113). This cannot be overstated.

Erasmus was reared in a Dutch monastery in a “strict puritanical” tradition of Devotio moderna in the general tradition of the German mystic Thomas A’ Kempis (113).  It was a reaction to scholasticism.  Mr. Daniell’s calls it anti-intellectual.  But anti-intellectual Erasmus was not. The focus was on meditation. During travels by Erasmus to Italy, he fell in love with all things Italian.

In Italy, he encounted Lorenzo Valla’s Adnotationes in Novum Testamentum. He devoured it as well as other works by Valla who had been writing from Rome.  It represented, Mr. Daniell tells us, a “break from the medieval to the modern era,” that is, methodologically a “new exegesis based on philology” (114).

Backgrounds to the Greek NT, 1516.

In 1504, Erasmus in the library of the Louvain studied Jerome and Origen’s Hexapla. Soon, he was at Magdalen’s College, Oxford and was encouraged by John Colet. In 1505, Erasmus wrote a commentary on Paul’s Epistle to the Romans with Valla’s Adnotationes at hand.  In 1506, Erasmus published his own Latin version of the Gospels and Epistles based on Greek manuscripts shown to him by Colet. By 1508, we find Erasmus in Venice with a printer, Manutius, where he further developed his involvement and knowledge of the Greek writers: Chrysostom, Basil and Origen. His time at Cambridge began in 1509 [remember, Thomas Cranmer was at Cambridge during this time…we’ve commented on that elsewhere]. Erasmus had contacts with Thomas More from London while in England (among many others). As such, Erasmus was beginning to see the need for a new critical Greek edition, but we get ahead of ourselves.

By 1508-1509, Erasmus’ goals were:

“…to reform the Church from within by a renewal of biblical theology, based on philological study of the New Testament text, and supported by a knowledge of patristics, itself renewed by the same methods. The final object was to nourish that chiefly moral and spiritual reform already quite clearly conceived in the Enchiridion militis Christiani, published at Antwerp in February 1504” (115).

Erasmus’ bottomline was to expound the philosophi  Christi.

Erasmus opened up and achieved four fronts:

1.      Produce a new critical Greek edition. He did this by 1516.

2.      Produce a sound edition of the biblical expositors from the Fathers

3.      Based upon the first two, develop new commentaries.  This he personally did (not to mention the flood-gate of other Reformers).

A.    In 1502, he already had developed four books of notes on Paul’s Epistle to the Romans

B.    By 1523-24, he had “paraphrases” on all epistles.

C.    By 1523, he had a “paraphrase” of Matthew dedicated to Charles V (at this point, Luther was already in operation, excommunicated by his church and under the Imperial ban with emerging consequences for English scholars and early English Reformers).

D.    By 1524, he had “paraphrased” Mark, Luke and John.

E.    He produced commentaries on Psalm 2, 3, 4, 85 and the Lord’s Prayer.

F.     Of note, these “paraphrases” were ordered up for all English parishes alongside the English “Great Bible” in 1539.  This was a major advance for the English church

4.      He expanded his influential Preface to the Greek NT, a “treatise of methodology” (116).

Erasmus did all these things, not aspirations but achievements.

The Printed NT in Greek, 1516.

Floating up the Rhine in 1514 and “feted everywhere,” Erasmus landed in Basel (115). He met Frobus, the publisher.  He stayed 2 years. In February 1516, he published his Novum Instrumentum...it rolled off the press. It was a Latin translation from the Greek NT. It contained the Latin alongside the Greek.  Half of the volume—some 300 pages themselves—discussed Greek annotations citing certain errors from the Vulgate; he cited 400 changes from the Latin. This was also the first new Latin translation in over 1000 years. This also contained chastisements of ecclesiastical abuses (actually, this was a common complaint not just in England, but also in 15^th-16^th Europe which we’ll develop elsewhere, e.g. Hardwick on the Articles).

Three Prefaces over time constantly advocated two things: (1) “diligent study of the New Testament” and (2) assertions “of the heretical point that no layman should be denied access to Scriptures in his own language” (emphasis added, 116).  This was entirely revolutionary for an English context, buried under the 1401 Act of De Haeretico Comburendo  and Canterbury’s 1409 Constitutions. These prefaces, of all things, proceed under the Privilegium, an authorization, of Emperor Maximilian with a dedication to Pope Leo X. Luther wouldn't be far behind and Leo would have to deal with him...and those consequences.

Mr. Daniell’s notes that the Preface contained exhortations to the Pope that “the New Testament should be used to acquaint the people with the Holy Scriptures”(again in their own languages).  The title page contained an oblique sarcasm with an allegorical drawing, Envy Defeated (117).  This underscores the widespread reports that the rank-and-file were not exposed to the vernacular Scriptures, that the OT and NT were essentials to their instruction in the faith, and that the Pope, divested of his super-claims and false claims, would, in time, become envious.  Direct hit!  But dangerous stuff too!

One writer summarized the force of Erasmus’ Preface:

“…a remarkable, passionate prefatory piece.  He called it Paraclesis—a Greek word meaning summons or exhortation.  It was […] an exhortation precisely to the universal mastery […] of God’s self-revelation […] as it was completed in Christ the Word of God incarnate, the fullness of wisdom, discovered in scripture and appropriated as the rule of life” (emphasis added, 117).

Here’s on passage of Erasmus’ explosive (when applied) Preface:

“Christ wishes his mysteries to be published as widely as possible. I would wish all women [PV: note the words “all women” despite an all-male clergy, even “women”] to read the gospel and the epistles of St. Paul, and I would wish that they were translated into all [PV: repeat “all”] the languages of all Christian people, and that they might be read and known, not merely by the Scotch and Irish [PV: apparently outliers and backwoodsmen in Erasmus’ mind], but even the Turks and Saracens. I wish that the husbandman [PV: or, farmers, non-clergy] might sing parts of them at his plow [PV: exactly what Tyndale would say later], that the weaver [PV: again, laymen] may warble them at his shuttle, that the traveller may with their narratives beguile the weariness of the way” (117).

This was stunning, staggering, explosive and revolutionary.  In time, it would prove that one couldn't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

4 more editions would follow from Eramus: 1519, 1522, 1527, and 1535. He died in 1536. Beza published one. Robert Estiennes, Paris, published one. Luther and Tyndale worked from Erasmus Greek NT.  One survived his persecutions while the other died in 1536.

Complutension Text.

About 1500, a Spanish scholar and Cardinal, Francisco Ximenes, established a “trilingual university” (119). He was devoted to producing a Hebrew, Greek and Latin.  He assembled scholars for the task. A 6-volume text was produced in 1517, including the Septuagint. The Pentateuch contained the Targums of Onkelos and an Aramaic version. The Greek had a Latin interlinear. The Hebrew was keyed to the Latin. But, printing issues including getting and imprimatur.  Ultimately by 1522, 600 volumes were printed. 

But, by 1522, Erasmus’ editions had already emerged at lower costs with greater availability (3300 volumes in the 1^st edition).  By 1522, Luther had a German translation based on Erasmus. By 1522, vernacular editions were published in the French, Dutch, Danish, and Swedish tongues. By 1525, Tyndale had been long at work. During these years, Cranmer was figuring out what and who he was.  11 years later, in 1536, Tyndale would fall to the shenanigans of a persecutory English bishop (at least 1), a bishop executing long-standing English policy.

More as this story develops.  Let is be noted that after Vatican II, 1962-1965), finally, vernacular readings were authorized for Roman services with allowance for readings by the people. Lest we forget the 600-year blackout.